Selected quad for the lemma: duty_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
duty_n	christian_a	faith_n	life_n	1,074	5	4.4282	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A07646	A gagg for the new Gospell? No: a nevv gagg for an old goose VVho would needes vndertake to stop all Protestants mouths for euer, with 276. places out of their owne English Bibles. Or an ansvvere to a late abridger of controuersies, and belyar of the Protestants doctrine. By Richard Mountagu. Published by authoritie.	Montagu, Richard, 1577-1641.	1624 (1624)	STC 18038; ESTC S112831	210,549	373

of the Sonne of man and drink his bloud you haue no life in you Lo without drinking no life euerlasting then poore deceiued Papists what will become of you you shall perish in your sinnes though your bloud shall bee required at the hands of your ignorant or rather deceitufll guides that thus mis-leade you from Christs Institution Luk. 24. 30 35. Christ at Emmaus communicated his disciples vnder one kinde Two things are insisted on out of these words as it appeareth by the laying downe First that this was actio sacra a Communion of the Body of our Sauiour then that it was done vnder one kinde this is taken as granted because there is no mention of drinking of Wine there is made mention of breaking the Bread Ignorants and wilfull take things amisse an ordinary Hebrew phrase it is in the Scriptures to eat bread to break bread for to eat and drink to take a refection or repast This man imagineth that all their meales were sicca conuiuia altogether without any liquor nor Wine nor Water vsed though in hot countries Such a foole would haue no other answer made vnto him but as Arisotle would haue made to him that should deny motion or that hee should neuer drink at his meales the best answer could possibly be made vnto him That it was actio sacra and not communis our Sauiour did celebrate the Communion of his Body and Bloud though I know it is controuerted for my part I will not contend at present I know it is held so by Augustine Theophylact and I adde too Beda and Hierome with others but take heede of the Precedent for if hee communicated onely Bread then I know not what vse of Wine at all there will bee in the blessed Sacrament For these were peraduenture of his Apostles but without all question of his Disciples and so had interest in the Cup if any had at all See more wee cannot Acts 2. 42. then we haue seene already mention made of breaking of Bread which is not exclusiue from drinking of Wine no more then 1. Cor. 11. 13. drinking doth exclude eating at all Poore shifts for Sacriledge and impiety of late made an Article of faith in the Church of Rome He that instituted the one ordained the other ioyntly both and at the same time with all circumstances alike if any aduantage is it is for Drink not for Eat For Drink you all of this saith the Author of the Sacrament hee saith not expresly Eat you all of this as foreseeing that impiety which in time humane presumption should bring-in vpon and against his owne institution fulfilled in the Church of Rome at this day XXXVII That Sacramental vnction is not to bee vsed to the sick VSe it if you will wee hinder you not nor much care or enquire what effects ensue vpon it but obtrude it not on vs or vnto the Church as in Censu of the Sacraments of the time of Grace as Baptisme is held and the Lords Supper Visible signes of inuisible Grace Powerfull instruments ordained by God to work in our Soules eternall Life by conueighing the meanes thereof vnto them Sacramental vnction call it if you please so farre as in the writings of the antient Fathers all Articles peculiar vnto our Christian faith and beliefe are sometime called Sacraments all duties of religious piety vnto God all diuine and Ecclesiasticall ceremonies are named Sacraments in which sense you might reckon not seuen but seuenscore if you were disposed to make a search for Sacraments In the Apostolicall and Primitiue Church it was a custome to anoint the sick with oyle to pray ouer them and so commit them vnto God This Saint Iames remembreth 5. 4. Is any sick among you Let him call for the Elders of the Church and let them pray ouer him anointing him with oyle in the name of the Lord. The Apostle doth not call it a Sacrament Sacramentall vnction as the Thesis proposeth and which is that should bee expresly prooued Our Bibles say the sick were anointed but not our Bibles nor theirs doe say that this anointing was a Sacrament And Fathers wee are not sent to see that proue it so the place is not to purpose as it is proposed Mar. 6. 13. is a Text defacto They anointed with oyle many that were sick and healed them but de iure there is not a word in that Text whether yea or no this Anointing should bee a Sacrament The Master of controuersies confesseth himselfe that it is not accorded whether in this Text or not Sacramentall vnction was instituted and himselfe is of opinion that it is not grounding on the resolution of the Councell of Trent to which all Papists are tyed to subscribe and yeeld and how dare you bring this as a proofe Now say the truth Sir Goose and shame the diuell How plain are these Texts that set your great Directors together by the ears Where were your sick wits that did not aduise you Take heed of falling foule with the Councel of Trent the cynosura of your faith Sure they were made of the pappe of an apple so easily they squeeze themselues out to nothing your great Dictators haue found hitherto but one direct Text Iames 5. 4. can we think your sharp sight should spy out three more a Fox or a Fearne-bush somewhat or nothing for Mat. 16. 18. Acts 28. 8. nor oyle nor vnction is remembred bare imposition of hands vpon the sick and diseased so that wee stand in some possibility heerafter to haue added an eightth Sacrament to the former seauen XXXVIII That no interior grace is giuen by the imposition of hands in the Sacrament of holy orders THis indeed is contrary vnto the expresse words of our Bible and therefore directly contrary to our Opinion Doctrine and Practice Can this fellowe bee so ignorant as not to know or rather so impudent as to deny that in giuing of holy orders we vse those memorable formall words of our Sauiour Receiue the holy Ghost Was euer man made Minister in the Church of England but in that sort with that forme Can hee deny that wee not onely practise it but propugne it command it to bevsed enquire of and punish the neglect opposition and contempt thereof What shall wee say to such a base detracting Varlet as shameth not in view of heauen and earth to deny the Sun shineth at noone-day Romane Catholiques I admire your patience that suffer such Hog-rubbers to leade you by the nose and make you beleeue the snowe is black Poore deceiued Soules trust no such Merchants that would sell you to the diuell for a morsell of bread and make you stand out vpon tearms of Separation for their owne aduantages against the Church as Schismaticks in which you liue and haue beene baptized XXXIX That Priests and other religious Persons or any others who haue vowed their chastity vnto God may freely marry notwithstanding their vowes TOuching marriage of Ministers this is our Doctrine resolued

bono morali and no more It may tend to Piety I grant but it is not intentione primâ and directly it is onely occasionally as else-where 1 Cor. 9. Am I not free or Acts 5. Was it not in thy Power That of Deuter. 30. 19. is more to purpose I call Heauen and Earth this day to record against you that I haue set before you life and death blessing and cursing therefore choose life that both thou and thy seede may liue For this is directly in point of Piety and performance of duty immediate vnto God Neither was it spoken to men according to generall notion of them and their generall state in case of alienation from God in state of Nature onely and Naturall endowments of which it is consented I thinke They cannot choose life but to men preuented by Grace called to Life assisted with much and many concurrances of Grace This is not contrary to our Tenent as is plaine in the Article before alleaged That of Ioshua 24. 15. is to the same purpose almost in the very same words one answere will serue to both The Article denieth free-will quoad points of Pietie to mere naturall men onely in the state of deprauation but auoucheth it in state of Grace with concurrence of Assistance Ecclesiasticus 15. 14. is not to purpose The wise man speaketh of what was not what is in the state of innocency before the fall not of deprauation being falne God from the beginning made man and left him in the hand of his owne counsell In 2 Sam. 12. I finde not for freewill but onely this Verse 17. that Dauid would not eate meate but refused it which place if ignorantly alledged proueth this fellow as hee hath beene discouered often a plaine blunderer if with aduise a shamelesse slanderer that would impute vnto Protestants such a sencelesse assertion that man had not free-will to eate if hee would for such is the inference vpon that allegation In Matth. 23. 37. There is an opposition of mans wilfulnesse vnto Gods will God would haue called Iudah Iudah would not therefore freely men renounce the calling of Grace and freely runne themselues without any absolute irreuersible decree vpon Perdition which I graunt being the purpose and intent of those succeeding Texts of Scripture with many moe to purpose in Gods Booke How this is done how farre it extendeth I list not to dispute It is for Schooles not for Pulpits searching wits are at stand therein common capacities must not be surcharged with it It is wilfulnesse or more to deny free-will and it is wisdome and truth to deny free-will To deny the being is so And I wish with Scotus in 1. dist 39. that a man so wilfull were well cudgelled vntill hee confessed it stood in mans power to desist from beating him But to giue such an absolute sway to free-will as many doe is little lesse than flat impiety against God against Saint Paul I am sure It is not of him that willeth or him that runneth Truth is in the middle betwixt two extreames euermore and here also What the Fathers teach wee know and where they exceede interpret them gently as you also doe For take them at large and they lauish so farre sometime that your greatest Patrons of free-will dare not ioyne issue with them not as if those worthie lights did any way faile or darkenesse possessed their cleare vnderstandings but being to deale against fatall necessity of the Pagans against impieties of the Manichees to cleare that imputation of belieuing without further enquiry of resolution they extended the power of freewill to the vtmost especially hauing then no cause to feare ante mota certamina Pelagiana there being no Pelagius yet risen vp in the world an enemy of Grace and aduauncer of Nature beyond degrees of power or possibility Thus your selues acknowledge as well as wee and therefore to Irenaeus Tertullian Cyprian Epiphanius and who hath much more to purpose than all the rest together Chrysostome though you name him not because you knew it not and to Augustine also in his former writings it might so be answered that they spake of free-will not in respect of Grace but of Nature yet I will particularly fall in with you to each seuerall Father in his order Irenaeus Lib. 4. cap. 7. hath these words as your Informer C. W. B. setteth them downe Almightie God hath put in man a power of Election as well as he hath done in the Angels And againe cap. 72. If it were not in our power to doe or not to doe these things what cause had the Apostle and long before that our Lord himselfe to giue vs counsell what to doe and from what to abstaine This latter testimony is not in the Gagger His Master hath it and I alledge it to let all Catholiques see what an Ideot this poore animall is C. W. B. hauing produced these two Texts of Irenaeus cited in his Margin lib. 4. cap. 7. and ibid. cap. 72. This goose because hee would not gagge vs too much made choyce of one and wisely too for by errour of the Printer it was put cap. 7. in which Chapter is nothing to purpose not a word of Angels or of free-will whereas it should haue beene cap. 71. Which hee not knowing because hee hath all by retaile a poore fellow that I thinke knoweth not who Irenaeus was followed the errour of the Printer and so sent vs to see nothing there But let him passe To the place I answere Irenaeus attributeth vnto man as hee may free-will before and after his fall but so after as with Grace to men in state of Grace The discourse is long and to purpose but mis-alledged heere and mis-applyed by the Gagger Epiphanius how commeth hee in betwixt Irenaeus and Tertullian being so much younger than eyther of them especially rightly disposed in the Instructor Howsoeuer I answere that hee there disputeth against the Pharises one of whose opinions was that all things came to passe through fatal necessity Which being so there can be no choyce nor free-will But experience sheweth and Scripture cleareth it there is free-will therefore fatall necessitie is not at all As true as Gospel Nothing touching vs who graunt it as much as themselues doe that obiect thus vnto vs. Tertullian in his second Booke against Marcion the Chapter you knew not because you were not told for your Instructor had it not It is Chapter V. discourseth thus He proueth against Marcion that God created all things out of goodnesse because hee was good Nor was the fall of man any worke of his at all but to be imputed vnto free-will A power and facultie originally in man according to Gods goodnesse and mans nature and condition Who could not haue deserued well or ill nor haue beene punished or rewarded except hee had beene left vnto his owne choyce and not necessitated vnto either Thus he at large and thus also we Contenting himselfe with the generall being working and